Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:04:54.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolving a design focus in response to design solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Mary Lou Maher
Mary Lou Maher
Affiliation:
Key Centre of Design Computing, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Most computer-based design tools assume designers work with a well-defined problem. The traditional treatment of design as two discrete phases; problem formulation and solution synthesis, is challenged by recent research. Though the view on discrete phases may be applicable to simple and/or well-defined design tasks, current research (Jonas, 1993; Logan & Smithers, 1993; Gero, 1994; Smithers et al., 1994) has shown that design is an ill-structured problem and the discrete phases view is not a good description of the process during which design alternatives are generated. A potential role of machine learning techniques is to provide a computational model of the changing representation of the design problem in response to the search for design solutions.

Type
Research Abstracts
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 10 , Issue 2: Special Issue: Machine learning in design , April 1996 , pp. 161 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Gero, J.S. (1994). Towards a model of exploration in computer-aided design. In Formal Design Methods for Computer-Aided Design (Gero, J.S. and Tyugu, E., Eds.), pp. 315–336. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Jonas, W. (1993). Design as problem-solving? or: Here is the solution — What was the problem? Design Studies 14(2), 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, B., & Smithers, T. (1993). Creativity and design as exploration. In Modelling Creativity and Knowledge-Based Creative Design (Gero, J.S. and Maher, M.L., Eds.), pp. 139–175. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York.Google Scholar
Maher, M.L., & Poon, J. (1996). Modelling design exploration as coevolution. Microcomputers in Civil Eng. 11, 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maher, M.L., Poon, J., & Boulanger, S. (1995). Formalizing design exploration as coevolution: A combined gene approach. In Preprints Formal Design Methods for CAD (Gero, J.S. and Sudweeks, F. Eds.), pp. 1–28. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Smithers, T., Corne, D., & Ross, P. (1994). Solving design problems by computational exploration. In Formal Design Methods for Computer-Aided Design (Gero, J.S. and Tyugu, E., Eds.), pp. 293–314. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar